« August 2006 | Main | October 2006 »

September 29, 2006

Selective Interventionism

Today I picked up a Wall Street Journal for the first time in ages.  When we first moved to New York, I briefly subscribed to the Journal and the Times, which was unsustainable even for me.  So now the Journal's free market evangelism, and utter lack of regard for international opinion about the actions of the United States, is an occasional vice.

I had hoped to stay away from the political pages in favor of the uncontroversial and fascinating "Weekend Journal" section.  But soon enough I was reading the editorials and opinion pieces.  The article that caught my eye was about Brazil's elections, which are set for Sunday.  (When we were in Brazil, we saw many teenagers on street corners waving flags for various politicians.)

Socialist president Lula da Silva is likely to win a second term, either on the first or second ballot.  The Journal paints a grim picture of a grossly corrupt administration; even granting that da Silva truly wanted to assist the poor, by now everyone around him just wants to feed at the trough.  Assuming this is true, the cause of this corruption is "interventionism" in the economy, which should be free.  In fact, the article begins with a quote by conservative philosopher Ludwig von Mises--"Corruption is a regular effect of interventionism."

The proper balance between a free market and a regulatory government is difficult to strike; this argument will go on forever.  But at least da Silva's version of interventionism takes place within his own country, on behalf of a populace that elected him.  Meanwhile, our own President's mode of interventionism involves invading other nations and imposing democracy at the point of a gun.  Lord knows that lots of corruption has resulted in Iraq; the most recent story is about the waste of $75 million to build a new police academy in Baghdad.

Since da Silva's interventionism is so upsetting, you'd expect outright howling from the Journal about George Bush's techniques.  But no. The paper continues to shill for the administration, even after many Republicans have seen the light about this misbegotten war.  Interventionism on behalf of poor Brazilians is worth shouting about, but why intervene to protest the car bombings of poor Iraqis?

September 28, 2006

Google Scholar Is Not for Librarians

I don't usually write about library issues here, but I do sincerely appreciate the fact that so many librarian colleagues read my postings.  So this one's for my librarian friends, although comments  from anyone are welcome.

Today I took a class about how to search Google Scholar, Google's imperfect portal to the scholarly literature.  Although I wrote a paper about Scholar over  a year ago,  it was more conceptual than practical. I haven't actually searched Scholar that much, so an introductory class seemed useful.

The class did not disappoint. The instructor showed us what Scholar is good for, and cautioned us about when it might not be helpful.  She discussed quirky search results that you would not expect, and repeatedly advised us that the best way to learn how to search it was to play it by ear.

Scholar does not have many functionalities that librarians are used to (or at least they are not obvious.) For example, many databases have "truncation" capabilities--the ability to search for multiple variants of a word by inserting a symbol into your search. In Scholar, it appears that you have to spell out every variant.

I can see why seasoned searchers would be frustrated; Scholar is far from the norm.  But as my colleagues questioned the instructor about its flaws, I kept thinking that Scholar is supposed to be simple.  The brilliance of Google is its directness; you just type some words and see what happens. Sure, you may get 4,000,000 results and have to start over.  But most people would rather do that than learn the sophisticated search strategies that librarians employ.

Scholar works pretty much like regular ol' Google. Hopefully refinements that librarians would appreciate will appear over time.  But it will never be like a typical database, for whom librarians are the primary consumers.  It is built for independent searchers, not for us. 

Jesus Camp

Last night Helen and I watched Jesus Camp, a new documentary about a Pentecostal summer camp located in--ironically enough--Devil's Lake, North Dakota.  Youth minister Becky Fischer is fervently training children to be soldiers of the Lord; several segments showed young males in camouflage  and war paint.  Fischer argues that, since some Muslims radicalize their young, Christians have no choice but to do the same. 

I grew up attending a conservative church, Cypress Wesleyan, in Galloway, Ohio.  I was curious to see how much of the movie reflected my childhood experience, and how much was different. 

Kids in war paint and speaking in tongues was unlike anything I ever experienced. But I did pledge allegiance to the Christian flag and the Bible as well as the American flag. On the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade every year, an inset in the church bulletin chronicled how many "babies" had perished. The minister's wife ridiculed the theory of evolution; how ridiculous could it be that we descended from monkeys, since God had a plan for our lives?  When I was 11 I wondered how to approach "un-saved" friends at middle school and share the good news about the redeeming love of Jesus Christ, and the necessity of "asking Christ into your heart" to avoid an eternity in hell.

All of these themes and activities appear in Jesus Camp.

I even attended a youth group called the Christian Youth Crusaders until sixth grade, which seemed innocuous then but feels far more sinister after September 11, 2001.   We met every Wednesday evening, and enjoyed some recreational activities and a Bible lesson.

In high school I edited the newsletter of the church youth group for a while. I also participated in "Bible Bowl"--the Christian kids version of Jeopardy--for two years.  When I arrived at Northwestern, my first strategy for dealing with the culture shock was to shield myself within the comforts of conservative Christianity.  So pretty soon I was a regular attendee at the meetings of the Campus Crusade for Christ.

Finally, in the summer after my freshman year of college, a conversation with my Aunt Linda caused me to begin wondering about everything that had seemed so certain.  Perhaps that freshman year had stimulated sufficient open-mindedness for me to start thinking differently; if so, my old church pals would attribute this to the corrupting influence of "the world."  But I'm grateful that I found another path.  Looking back, it seems unreal that I used to sing songs about the healing blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

My past, strange though it now seems, explains why I have a soft spot for proponents of intelligent design.  I have no doubt that the theory of evolution is correct, and that intelligent design is pseudo-science at best.  But I understand the social context that gives this theory such power, and I believe that its proponents are good people. 

Whenever secular intellectuals rail against the idiocy of those rubes in the heartland, I know that they have absolutely no understanding at all of how conservative Christians see the world.

Two New Yorkers directed Jesus Camp, so I was expecting some city snobbery in their approach. I was pleasantly surprised; it was a fair portrayal.  I also wondered about how the oh-so-sophisticated Manhattan audience would take it.  Again, not too bad.  Nobody laughed out loud until Pastor Fischer asked God to bless her Power Point slides and electrical system. And at that point, the Lord knows she deserved it.

September 23, 2006

TypeKey Authentication

My first attempt at holding off the spammers didn't work, so from now on you'll have to sign in to comment.  That's pretty annoying, but I refuse to run ads for casinos as comments!

Hope this isn't too onerous. Thank you for reading.

Hugo and Noam, George and Pervez

One of the more humorous outcomes of Hugo Chavez's speech at the UN this week is the blockbuster success of Noam Chomsky's   Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (2003).  After Chavez touted the book from the lectern, inquisitive readers everywhere snapped it up.  Chomsky critic Alan Dershowitz thinks that hardly anyone will actually read it, and he's probably right.  I for one have never been able to make it through Chomsky's turgid prose, in English or in Spanish. 

But it may be enough that Hugo caused more people to pay attention to Noam, and the troubling questions about the use of American power that he raises.

I'm less impressed with George's promotion of the upcoming book by Pervez.  Yesterday President Bush encouraged reporters to buy the soon-to-be-released book by Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf. This came after Musharraf was less than forthcoming about his recent capitulation to the tribal leaders who are protecting Osama bin Laden; buy the book, press corps, and you'll get your answers.

To be fair, George didn't promote his book as vigorously as Hugo.  But you have to wonder why he was  standing with Pervez at all,  and why he had not ordered his assassination years ago.

Remember the "Bush doctrine?"  Shortly after September 11, 2001, the President claimed that the United States would make no distinction between terrorists and the nations that harbor them. 

No nation has violated the Bush doctrine more than Pakistan.  In addition to allowing bin Laden to live in peace among his friendly protectors in rural Pakistan, Musharraf has treated nuclear scientist Abdul Q. Khan with kid gloves.  Khan was willing to sell nuclear secrets to anyone for the right price, but he remains a national hero. 

In both cases, Musharraf's desire not to stir up a hornet's nest may be understandable.  But--even though the author of the Bush doctrine can't see it--he is certainly not a valuable ally in the fight against terrorism.

P.S.: The spell-checker says that Pervez=Peeves. That seems appropriate.





September 21, 2006

No Comment Spam Allowed

Alas, almost two years of allowing comments without any barriers will have to end. Tonight I got my first taste of comment spam, with much more sure to follow.

Everyone is still very welcome to leave comments. But from now on you'll have to pass an annoying little test to prove that you're human. Sorry.

Chavez Takes New York

The UN General Assembly is in session this week.  For me, this means that I ride the subway home instead of the more efficient First Avenue bus.  For the world, it has meant fascinating political theater.

President Bush tried to talk directly to the people of Iran in his speech, but this is hard to do when you have no moral authority.  Later the same day, Iran's Holocaust-loving president addressed the assembly without wearing a tie.

These were both warm-up acts.  Yesterday Venezuela's Hugo Chavez capped off the proceedings by repeatedly referring to President Bush as the devil.  Following a sometimes comical speech, he made another address at the Cooper Union (where Abraham Lincoln once spoke.)  Here Chavez received a standing ovation, for accusing devil Bush of "genocide" in Iraq.

Chavez's moral clarion call becomes murkier upon closer inspection.  As many conservatives have noted, average Venezuelans have to think twice about calling Chavez the "devil" in public.  Yes, South America does not have the same level of freedom of expression as we do; this is like comparing apples and oranges. Even so, Chavez exploited freedoms that he is afraid to grant his own people.

Another trouble spot--At one point Chavez held up a night-time satellite photo, which shows lights burning in wealthy nations while most of the world is dark.  His point is that wealthy nations are wasteful consumers of energy. This is certainly true.  But since Venezuela's revenues depend heavily on oil, the reality is that Hugo wants us to keep on wasting that energy.  Behind the righteous ideologue lies an oil man, just like another president we all know.

A final sore spot--One of Hugo's fans is former attorney general Ramsey Clark.  Clark is now doing his best to defend the genocidal actions of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.  Whether Bush committed genocide in Iraq is at least debatable, but Saddam's crimes are not. 

I doubt that Clark and Chavez see the contradiction.

So I can't put Chavez up on a leftist pedestal. He doesn't deserve it.

But be that as it may, we shouldn't dismiss him altogether.  Chavez speaks what many people feel; our nation's worldwide stature has declined dramatically during the presidency of George W. Bush. We can ignore Hugo Chavez, but not the anger that he represents.

September 19, 2006

These Times Demand the Times

Today's paper has a 24 page spread about the importance of the Times and the glory of its writers.  This is part of the roll-out for a new high-bandwidth multimedia campaign, "These Times Demand the Times."  This slogan first appeared in the mid-1980s, and the paper has decided that it's time for a resurrection.

In true Times style, the print spread is arrogant and more than a little amusing.  But, after giggling, I remembered that these really are perilous times for journalists in the United States. 

Politicians and reporters are natural adversaries.  But usually politicians have some awareness of the importance of the press.  President Bush seems to want a free media in Iraq, but he is pretty annoyed that he has to put up with any public scrutiny at home.  And now that the Times has defied his wishes not to publish two important stories--first on illegal wiretapping, then on financial monitoring of terrorist groups--Bush drones chant that the paper will have "blood on its hands."

So a repressive mood is in the air, although the President won't get very far at warping the nation's values.  One reason he will fail is because of institutions like the New York Times

September 17, 2006

Good Writing

The blog has been dreary lately.  First I was sad about September 11, and then angry about how President Bush exploited the day for political purposes.  Thank goodness Helen came along to enliven this place with some cheer.

In the midst of my funk, last week the latest "Rural Life" column appeared in the New York Times. I've loved these brief meditations on country living for years, and was upset when the Times temporarily paid it a pay-per-view feature online.  Now it is free, as it should be.

The wonderfully named Verlyn Klinkenborg writes these pieces.  One benefit of "The Rural Life" is that it gives a window into a country life that I will only experience in passing--for example, as a guest at a country bed and breakfast.  But the greatest benefit is that the writing is just so good.

"Death of a Farmer"
was last week's selection.  Klinkenborg reports that his cousin Myron has just died, which reminds of his awkwardness on Myron's farm growing up.  Myron worked the land, and Verlyn just read books.  So he really didn't know what to do on his summer visits to the farm. Many years later, even after Verlyn becomes a county farmer himself, that formative difference means something.

Not that Myron made him feel guilty about this; Verlyn just knew.  Myron was actually warm and generous with his younger cousin, and quite a chatterbox once he got going.  Now Verlyn wishes they had talked more when he had the chance.  But it's a wistful longing, not the wail of a heart torn to pieces.  And like all good writers, the best way for Klinkenborg to express his regret is to put it on the page.

September 13, 2006

Guest Entry By Helen: A Day At The Polls

Yesterday I worked as a poll worker in the New York primary election.  Marcus thought it would be fun for me to write a guest blog entry to share my experience.

Why did I sign up to be a poll worker?  I received an email from Citizens Union earlier this summer, asking people to be poll workers.  It sounded like a cool thing to do and so I signed up.  My friends who have worked as poll workers before told me that it’s “really boring.”  But for $200 pay for a day’s work, how can anyone decline?  As it turned out, my day was nothing but interesting:

5:00 AM – I woke up. (I promise this blog entry gets better as it goes along.)

5:30 AM – I woke Marcus up to walk with me to the polling site, which was in the public high school right across the street from our apartment.

5:35 AM – Many booths and tables were set up in the school’s lobby and cafeteria areas.  I found the table to which I was assigned:  Assembly District 65, Election District 71.  There were six of us poll workers assigned to the table.

5:40 AM – We frantically unpacked our supplies (signs, voter cards, instructions, affidavit ballots, voter lists, etc.), set up our table, and opened our voting booth.

6:00 AM – The polls opened.  Our first voter was an older man dressed in a suit and accompanied by a suitcase.  We asked him whether he was a Democrat or Republican.  We found his name in the voter list.  He signed next to his name.  We wrote his name on a green voter card (green card for Democrat; red card for Republican).  We turned the lever on the outside of the booth to where it said “Democrat.”  The man went inside the booth, voted, and left.  Phew, it went pretty smoothly.

7:40 AM – I spotted Marcus at the voting booth next to ours.  He had come in to vote on his way to work.  I silently willed him to vote for Mark Green, the less popular (but more appropriate) candidate for the Attorney General office.  As we waved goodbye to each other, I saw in his smile that he had voted for Andrew Cuomo instead.

7:58 AM – The high school students and teachers began streaming through the lobby to their respective classrooms, creating chaos among voters, poll workers, and everyone in between.  The information clerk woman, whose job was to direct voters to their voting booths, had a hard time picking out the voters from the teachers.  Finally, she figured out a way to tell the difference, “if they walk in looking purposeful, they’re the teachers; otherwise, they’re the voters.” 

8:25 AM – It was kind of slow, so I walked to the voting booth next to ours to vote myself.  I became a U.S. citizen last November, so this voting thing was all new to me.  I signed my name, received my green voter card, and went through the black curtains into the voting booth.  I moved the big lever to the voting position, turned the little black knobs according to my selection, and pushed the big lever back to the left.  What an old-fashioned, mechanical way of voting, I thought.  But at the same time, the sounds made by the big lever somehow made it feel so important and official.  I was glad I voted in these machines before New York moves to electronic voting next year.   

9:03 AM – As I was just starting to read my Agatha Christie novel, a woman in her early 50s came to our table.  We looked up her name in the voter list.  “My husband’s name is right above mine.  Can you tell me if he is still registered as a Republican?” she asked.  We looked, “yup, he’s registered as a Republican.”  “I need to remind him to change it.”  “A party conversion, huh?” my fellow poll worker asked, about to congratulate her on successfully changing her husband’s political views.  “Oh, no,” she objected, “he has always been a Democrat; but years ago, people registered themselves in a different party in order to be able to vote in a way that was best for the Democrats.”  This was obviously something people did a long time ago, because the woman turned to me and said, “This was before your time.”  I learn something new everyday.   

10:13 AM – We had 18 voters by this point.  Not surprisingly, being in Manhattan, everyone who came up to us had been Democrats.  Voter #19 arrived—a friendly young woman dressed in a dark suit.  Following the procedure, we asked her whether she was a Democrat or Republican.  “Republican,” she said.  We did a silent gasp collectively and tried not to stare at this rare breed in front of us.  “Don’t look at me with those crazy eyes!” she said.  “Ha ha ha,” we laughed with her, our laughs slightly more hearty than hers.

11:30 AM – Even though we had only 38 voters in the first six hours, I was only on page 25 in my novel, thanks to my talkative fellow poll workers.  Jimmy was the most entertaining of all.  He was a 61-year-old, black, New York native, jazz-loving, single, Vietnam veteran.  He told us about forging his mother’s signatures on his high school report cards, back when he drank lots of coffee and beer.  Now he drank neither coffee nor beer.  He told us about being drafted, about the dangerously high dosage of drugs the VA hospital gave him when he reported having nightmares after the war, about how he escaped from the hospital once he realized he was worse off taking the drugs, about how the Iraq war was worse than Vietnam, and about his cousin who insisted on treating him to Starbucks drinks even though he doesn’t care for coffee.

12:00 PM – It was lunch time.  I got Chinese food takeout and ate at home in front of the TV.  The local news showed footage of local candidates making their appearances at various polling sites.  I felt a tinge of jealousy—how come they had not visited our site?!

1:33 PM – Working professionals had all come and gone; now was the time for the retirees to stop by and vote.  Our next voter reminded me of an older and paler version of Richard Simmons.  The resemblance was in the jolly personality and the colorful headband.  As he walked up to the voting booth after signing and receiving his voter card, he raised his hands in the air happily and said to himself, “Time to vote!”  What a character.

3:15 PM – School was out.  Students streamed through the lobby noisily, again creating a chaotic scene at the polling site.  Then we noticed this one kid, probably in 9th grade, who was being accompanied by a man we assumed to be the vice principal.  A minute later, the kid’s father came.  He was dressed in street clothes, in his 30s, and walked with a cane.  Apparently, the boy was an hour late returning from lunch, and had to serve detention that day.  The father lectured the boy with a slightly raised voice.  Even though the lecture sounded harsh, we could tell he was a very caring father.  As the vice principal led the boy back up the stairs to detention, the father called out to his son, “Are you okay?”  Such a question is so frequently used when a child scraps his knees or falls off his bike, but in this case, a caring father was making sure his son wasn’t wounded by his words.

5:00 PM – Now was dinner time.  I went home and cooked myself some pasta.  I ate it my favorite way—with butter and salt. 

7:00 PM – Just two more hours until the close of the polls.  We started talking through our plan of action—the faster we close the poll, the earlier we get to go home!  Our huddle was interrupted by a commotion at the table across from ours.  Apparently a woman had walked in with her dog held in her arms.  The poll workers at that table informed her that animals (except for service animals) were not allowed at the poll site.  The woman was furious, “I have been voting here the last eleven years and this is the first time I have been told dogs are not allowed.”  Since I love dogs and hers was a cute one, I walked up to her and offered to hold her dog outside while she voted.  She ignored me and continued to argue with the poll workers.  No one budged.  Finally, the policeman escorted the woman and her dog outside.  She never returned.

8:27 PM – My poll worker friend Adrienne had made it a goal for our team to get at least 100 voters by the end of the day, which would be a 20% turnout in our election district.  She even created a grading system, “If we get 90 voters, that’s a C; 95 is a B; 100 is an A.”  When our 100th voter finally came during this last hour, we all cheered.

9:00 PM – The poll was closed!  We frantically packed everything up, following detailed instructions provided in our poll worker book.  We closed our booth and recorded the number of votes received by each candidate.  (Green had more votes than Cuomo in our election district!)  As the chairperson, I wrote the numbers down carefully.  We all took turns signing the documents.

9:27 PM – After some confusion regarding which envelope goes inside which larger envelope, we locked up our poll booth and submitted the paperwork to the policeman.  We said our goodbyes.  “See you in November!”   

 

Helen_poll_worker

Published Pieces

July 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31